Gold Medallion

"It is the rejection of Bible truth which makes men approach to infidelity. It is a backsliding church that lessens the distance between itself and the Papacy."

"The papacy is just what prophecy declared that she would be, the apostasy of the latter times... Shall this power, whose record for a thousand years is written in the blood of saints, be now acknowledged as a part of the church of Christ?"

SUBJECT: An Audience with Pope Paul VI by Official Representative of the Seventhday Adventist Church

On May 18, 1977, Dr. B. B. Beach, then Secretary of the Northern Europe-West Africa Division of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, along with other representatives of the religious bodies which form the Conference of Secretaries of the World Confessional Families (Churches), had an audience with Pope Paul VI. The Pope welcomed these men as "representatives of a considerable portion of Christian people" and he sent the greetings of the Papacy through them "to your confessional families." (RNS, May 19, 1977. See p. 8 of this Special Report) Elder W. Duncan Eva, a vice president of the General Conference, reported that on this occasion, Dr. Beach presented the Pope a medallion which was a gold-covered symbol of the Seventh-day Adventist Church." (Review, Aug. 11, 1977, p. 23) Concerning this meeting, Religious News Service (RNS) stated that Dr. Beach "noted that the audience with the Pope marked the first time in history that the Seventh-day Adventist Church, through an official representative, had met with a Roman Pontiff." The leadership of the Church is seeking to play down this event. The Editor of the�Adventist Review, Kenneth H. Wood, in a letter dated, February 22, 1978, wrote to a layman stating - "I am personally very well acquainted with Dr. Bert Beach and have discussed with him this visit. Even though the visit may look sinister to Brother Grotheer, the visit was entirely innocent and meaningless so far as any relationship goes between SDA's and the Catholics." In this SPECIAL REPORT, we shall present documented facts - primary, not secondary - concerning the background of this audience between Pope Paul VI and Dr. B. B. Beach - then leave with you the reader to draw your own conclusions. These documents will consist of official publications of the World Council of Churches (WCC) , Catholic newspapers, Letters addressed to me personally, and Letters and Statements from the files of the General Conferences offices.

"And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also." - II Timothy 2:2

This admonition of Paul to Timothy - "commit thou to faithful men" - is basic if the message given to any people or movement is to remain pure and viable. To this Church was committed the trust of the Three Angels' Messages of Revelation 14:6-12. Of this fact, it is written:

"In a special sense Seventh-day Adventists have been set in the world as watchmen and light bearers. To them has been entrusted the last warning message for a perishing world. On them is shining wonderful light from the word of God. They have been given a work of the most solemn import, - the proclamation of the first, second, and third angels' messages. There is no other work of so great importance. They are to allow nothing else to absorb their attention.

to be warned, and God's people are to be true to the trust committed to them." (9T:19)

"Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication. (Rev. 14:8)

How was this understood by the spiritual forefathers of this Church, to whom the giving of this message was committed? We read:

"This message was understood by Adventists to be an announcement of the moral fall of the churches in consequence of their rejection of the first message....

"The term Babylon, derived from Babel, and signifying confusion, is applied in Scripture to the various forms of false or apostate religion. But the message announcing the fall of Babylon must apply to some religious body that was once pure, and has become corrupt. It cannot be the Romish Church which is here meant; for that church has been in a fallen condition for many centuries. But how appropriate the figure as applied to the Protestant churches, all professing to derive their doctrines from the Bible, yet divided into almost innumerable sects." (SP, IV, pp. 232-233)

"If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God." (Rev. 14:9-10a)�

"The image is made to the first or leopard-like beast, which is the one brought to view in the third angel's message. By the first beast is represented the Roman Church, an ecclesiastical body clothed with civil power, having authority to punish all dissenters. The image to the beast represents another religious body clothed with similar power. The formation of this image is the work of that beast whose peaceful rise and mild professions render it so striking a symbol of the United States. Here is to be found an image to the papacy. When the churches of our land, uniting upon such points of faith as are�held by them in common, shall influence the State to enforce their decrees and sustain their institutions, then will Protestant America have formed an image of the Roman hierarchy." (SP, IV, p. 278)

"When the churches of our land, uniting upon such points of faith as are held by them in common, shall influence the State to enforce their decrees and sustain their institutions, then will Protestant America have formed an image of the Roman hierarchy." This does not exempt any church - "the churches of our land" - but does picture an ecumenical movement - "uniting upon such points of faith as are held be them�in common." Certain direct results are pictured - "shall influence the State to... sustain their institutions" - government aid.

These are the messages and warnings entrusted to the Church. Our spiritual forefathers committed this heritage to those whom they thought to be "faithful men." How is this commitment being handled by the Church's leadership today?

In 1973, the World Council of Churches (WWC) published a paperback book entitled -�So Much in Common�(SMC). This book contained "Documents of Interest in the Conversations Between the World Council of Churches and the Seventh-day Adventist Church." (p. 1) One of these "Documents" outlines the history of the conversations from their inception in 1965 through 1969. It will be seen that the events

which transpired during these years finally led to the meeting of the Conference of Secretaries of the World Confessional Families in Rome, which in turn provided the setting for the audience that Dr. B. B. Beach had with the Pope as an official representative of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Strange as it may seem, these yearly consultations [between representatives of the WCC and the SDA Church] were an indirect by-product of Vatican II. In fact, while in Rome in connection with the Vatican Council a WCC staff member and an Adventist representative came to the conclusion that an informal meeting of a small group of Seventh-day Adventists with an equal number of representatives from the World Council of Churches would fulfil a useful purpose." (SMC, p. 98)

"The first meeting was held in 1965, the participants being selected by the two organizers. Thus, the conversations got under way on a completely informal basis and were held under the sole responsibility of the participants." (Ibid.)

It should be carefully noted that up to this point the conversations between the representatives of the WCC and the Seventh-day Adventists were strictly an individual matter, and did not carry any official recognition from neither the WCC, nor the Adventist Church.

"Subsequent meetings have become somewhat more formal, in the sense that the employing bodies of the SDA participants have authorized and financed their presence and the executive committees of the three Adventist Divisions involved have given their blessings by facilitating the selection of the SDA representatives; the World Council of Churches has defrayed the expenses of its group. The General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists has been kept informed regarding the meetings, though it has taken no direct, active part in the Consultations, except through its three European Divisional branch offices." (Ibid.)

Herein is a very subtle situation which permits the leadership in Washington to say to the laity of the American Church sector who might inquire, that the General Conference is not involved with the WCC. But through their divisions in Europe, direct consultations were being carried forward with the full approval and financial blessings of the respective Executive Committees, each of which was chaired by a Vice President of the General Conference voted to serve as a President in each Division. From fifteen to twenty participants have taken part in the five Consultations from 1965 - 1969. The Adventist members have included "SDA church leaders and educators." (Ibid.�p. 99) "The Consultations [were] held on the basis of equal footing, each yearly meeting taking place part of the time at the WCC headquarters in Geneva and the rest of the time at the nearby Seminaire Adventiste at Collonges, just across the border in France." (Ibid.)

"A very useful product of the Conversations is the statement regarding the SDA Church which was published in January, 1967, issue of the�Ecumenical Review." (Ibid.) [The Ecumenical Review�is a journal of the WCC]

With this began a very interesting series of events. Following the publication of this document prepared by the assistant director of the WCC Secretariat on Faith and Order, R. F. Cottrell, an Associate Editor of the�<Review�- the "Official Organ of the Seventh-day Adventist Church" - reviewed the WCC document in a series of three editorials (March 23, March 30, and April 6, 1967). Cottrell stated why

the Adventist Church could not join the World Council of Churches, but in concluding his third editorial, he invited the Church in through the back door of the WCC. Here is what he wrote:

"It is with no small measure of regret that SDA's do not find it possible, as an organization, to be more closely associated with others who profess the name of Christ. On the other hand, if the Secretariat on Faith and Order, for instance, were to invite SDA's to appoint someone competent in that area to meet with their group from time to time and represent the SDA point of view, we could accept such an invitation with a clear conscience." (Review, April 6, 1967, p. 13)

This "back door" was quickly opened. Dr. Earle Hilgert, then Professor of New Testament at Andrews University was appointed by the WCC Central Committee to serve as a Seventh-day Adventist on the Faith and Order Commission. His place is now filled by Dr. R. Dederen, also of Andrews University. Herein is a tricky relationship that must be carefully worded to give the whole truth and nothing but the truth. The SDA Church�did not appoint�the Adventist representative to the WCC Commission; but�it did approve�the selection which was made by the Central Committee of the WCC. Thus it can be said - "We are not members."

"Since the Conversations got under way, it has become the accepted procedure for the SDA Church to be represented at various WCC meetings, including the Assembly, by observers. These observers have not been present�pro forma, but have taken an active interest in the meetings attended. An additional step was taken when the General Conference, as a world confessional body or church, was represented by an advisor in Canterbury at the 1969 meeting of the WCC Central Committee." (SMC, p. 101)

The hierarchy in Washington can write in the�Adventist Review, and in letters to the laity that the Church does not belong to the WCC - and technically this is true - but how can we honestly leave the impression that we are not deeply involved in the work and procedures of the WCC when we attend the General Assemblies not�pro forma, but as active participants, and when we have an advisor�present at the meetings of the Central Committee of the WCC. If we send advisors to their Central Committee meetings, what should prevent the WCC from sending advisors to General Conference Committee meetings or Annual Councils? It should be further noted that "As a kind of corollary to the Geneva Consultations, Consultations began in 1969 in the United States between Seventh-day Adventists and a WCC appointed group." (SMC, p. 101) Have the laity been given a report of these meetings in the�Adventist Review? Why not?

These Consultations are filtering down to a national level in Europe. The same document reports:

"Since 1968 the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists have been actively represented at the annual meetings of 'Secretaries of World Confessional Families.' This participation is largely the result of the WCC/SDA Conversations and contacts

What is this organization? What is its relationship to the World Council of Churches? We shall answer the second question first. Robert Welsh of the Commission on Faith and Order of the WCC wrote under date, April 1, 1975 from Geneva, Switzerland - "With regard to Dr. Beach, he is Secretary of the Annual Conference of Secretaries of the World Confessional Families. Faith and order relates to this conference in a consultative manner." Dr. Beach himself states - "The bodies represented there [at the Conference] are between 12 and 15 world organizations such as the Lutheran World Federation, the Baptist World Alliance, the World Methodist Council, the World Reformed Alliance, the Roman Catholic Church, the Salvation Army, and the Anglican Consultative Council." (Letter to Pastor A. G. Brito, dated, Nov. 15, 1977) In another paragraph in the same letter, Beach declares - "I would like to make it clear that this conference is not a part of the World Conference of Churches." However, RNS (May 19, 1977) quoted the president of the Conference, Bishop John Howe, as stating - "we have been able to decide how we shall work together more with the World Council of Churches in understanding the ecumenical role that all of us have."

Now to the first question - Beach denies that this conference is an organization since he states it doesn't have a constitution, nor are dues paid into it. However he writes:

We shall let the reader decide whether there is an organization - officers, agenda, minutes! But please, do not give publicity to this fact, it will serve no useful purpose!

It was our involvement in the Annual Conference of "Secretaries of the World Confessional Families" that led to the audience with the Pope. The Catholic Church joined this conference the same year as the Seventh-day Adventist Church did, and it has been represented at these annual meetings through the Vatican Secretariat for Unity. Beach, himself, has written -

In a letter dated, March 3, 1978, Elder W. Duncan Eva noted in a very clear manner

This "probability" was so sure that the medallion given was "paid for from Departmental expense funds of the Northern Europe-West Africa Division."

Thus the beginnings of what appeared to be an "innocent" dialogue between an individual of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and an individual connected with the WCC ended up in a formal audience with the Pope by an official representative of the Adventist Church who presented to the Pope as a "symbol" of the Church, "a gold-covered" medallion. (Review, August 11, 1977, p. 23)

"It was by departure from the Lord, and alliance with the heathen, that the Jewish church became an harlot." (GC, p. 382)

Every quotation in the preceding topic - "Steps to Rome" - which is from the book -�So Much in Common�(SMC) - is from a single document within the book entitled - "The World Council of Churches/Seventh-day Adventist Conversations and Their Significance." It was written by none other than Dr. B. B. Beach, himself. The book -�So Much in Common�- carried an "Introductory Statement" signed cojointly by Dr. Beach and Dr Lukas Vischer of the Faith and Order Secretariat of the World Council of Churches. This book may be obtained by writing to the WCC, 150 route de Ferney, 1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland.

On January 18, 1978, I wrote to Elder W. Duncan Eva, Vice President of the General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and asked:

1)�What committee, or church official authorized the audience with Pope Paul VI, and the presentation of the medallion overlaid with pure gold?

2)�It is my understanding that all gold and silver issues of this medallion were serially numbered. What was the serial number of the one given to the Pope?

3)�From your article in the�Review, and the RNS release, this audience and presentation was made in conjunction with Dr. B. B. Beach's attendance at the Conference of Secretaries of the World Confessional Families. Who gave the authorization for this trip and paid the costs of travel to attend?

4)�While the cost of the medallion [then] was only nominal - $45.00 as stated by Miss Hetzell - from what funds was this taken?

On March 3, 1978, I received the following reply regarding these questions from Elder Eva. He wrote:

"l.�The Northern Europe-West Africa Division Committee authorized Brother Beach's trip to Rome and it was understood that the visit to the Pope with representatives of the World Confessional Families was a probability.�

"2.�Dr Beach does not know the serial number of the medallion presented to the Pope and I am not able to obtain it here.

"4. The medallion was paid for from Departmental expense funds of the Northern Europ-West Africa Division."

VATICAN CITY (RNS)�-- Pope Paul, receiving participants of the Conference of Secretaries of World Confessional Families, urged unceasing pursuit of the goal of "full unity in Christ and in the Church," despite "all obstacles."

"It is a joy for us to receive such an important group and to welcome you to the See of Peter," said the Pope. "In you we greet representatives of a considerable portion of Christian people and through you we send greetings of grace and peace in the Lord to your confessional families."

The Conference, a grouping of Anglican, Protestant, Orthodox, Old Catholic, and other Christian church bodies, which was formed in 1957, met in Rome (May 16 - 18) for the first time.

The Vatican Secretariat for Christian Unity and the Seventh-day Adventists became regular participants in the Conference in 1968.

"We are pleased," Pope Paul told the Conference participants, "to give expression in your presence to our common faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the one mediator with the Father, the Saviour of the world.

"Yes, brothers, with the Apostle Peter we proclaim that there is salvation in none else, for there is no other Name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."

The pontiff went on to remark that "on her part," the Catholic Church is solemnly committed by the Second Vatican Council to "an ecumenism based on increased fidelity to Christ the Lord and on conversion of hearts.

"At the same time she realizes that nothing is so foreign to ecumenism as a false conciliatory approach. Strengthened by the power of God's work," he urged, "Let us then, despite all obstacles, pursue the goal of full unity in Christ and in the Church..."

Later, in Vatican Radio interviews, two officers of the Conference of Secretaries of the World Confessional Families, expressed satisfaction with the Rome meeting. Bishop John Howe, secretary general of the Anglican Consultative Council, who is president of the Conference, said it had been "a satisfactory meeting" because "we had secretaries here from the world organizations of nearly all the Churches, including the (Vatican) Secretariat for Unity." "It was a brotherly discussion," said the Anglican prelate, "and we have been able to decide how we shall work together more with the World Council of Churches in understanding the ecumenical role that all of us have."

Dr. Bert Beach, the Conference secretary, who is secretary of the Northern Europe-West Africa Division of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, noted that the audience with Pope Paul marked the first time in history that the Seventhday Adventist Church, through an official representative, had met with a Roman pontiff. Dr. Beach also said it had been "a pleasure" to be able to attend the Conference meeting in Rome, and that the meeting had provided "a good opportunity" for reflecting on "the work that has been accomplished" by the Conference since its founding.

In connection with a recent consultative meeting of secretaries of World Confessional Families held in Rome, B. B. Beach, secretary of the Northern Europe-West Africa Division, one of the 15 participants and the only Adventist in the group, presented a book and a medallion to Pope Paul VI on May 18.

The book presented was the Adventist missionary book�Faith in Action, and the medallion was a gold-covered symbol of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. The medallion is an engraved witness to the Adventist faith in Christ as Creator, Redeemer, and soon-coming Lord, in the cross and Bible, and in the lasting validity of the Ten Commandments. While the other commandments are represented simply as Roman numerals, the words of the fourth - "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy "are written out.

The Conference of World Confessional Families usually meets once a year. It is not an organization, but an informal, unstructured forum for consultation and the exchange of useful information. W. D. EVA --REVIEW, AUGUST 11, 1977 (847) 23

On Wednesday, the 18th of May, Pope Paul received in Separate audience participants of the Secretarial Conference of the United Church World. The group was accompanied by Bishop John Howe, Chief Secretary of the Anglican Assembly Council and Mr. B. B. Beach, Chief Secretary of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. This is the first time a representative of this religion has met with the Pope who was thus presented with a gold medal. Upon their greeting, Paul VI answered:

"I am happy that we may receive such an esteemed group and express welcome from the Throne of Peter. In you, we greet representatives of the greater part of Christian believers and through you send greetings of God's mercy to your religious churches. I am glad that we may express in your presence our common faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only Intercessor with the Father and Redeemer of the World. Yes, brothers, with the apostle Peter we proclaim that there is salvation in nothing else. 'For there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved.' (Acts 4:12) As concerns us, at the 2nd Vatican Council, the Catholic Church has sacredly engaged itself in ecumenicalism, established in and arisen out of faith in Christ our Lord and in the conversion of hearts. (UR 6-7) Strengthened by the power of God's word, let us continue, in defiance of all obstacles, to walk toward our goal of complete unity in Christ and in the Church."

to Radio-Vatican an announcement in which he distinctly emphasized the importance of that first meeting of an Adventist with the Pope. He is quoted as saying, "It is a distinct honor to be present as Secretary of the Conference in an audience here in Rome with the Holy Father upon which I presented to the Pope a book describing the work of the Adventist Church throughout the world."

This article taken from the Catholic Bi-Weekly published in Zagreb, Yugoslavia, gives the Catholic version a of what took place. The name of the newspaper -Glas�(Voice) and�Koncila�(Council) - can be interpreted as the Voice of the Council. In the upper left hand corner of the "slag" which appears on page 1 of the newspaper are the words - "Novo Lice Crkve (only a blur as reproduced on p. 9) A literal translation reads - "New Face Church" - but in conversational English - "The New Image of the Church." In other words, this newspaper reflects the spirit of Vatican II, and gives from that viewpoint how the Catholic Church viewed the audience with the Pope by the Secretaries of the World Confessional Families, which included Dr. B. B. Beach of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

One notes that the newspaper referred to Dr. Beach as "Chief Secretary of the Seventh-day Adventist Church." This is not strictly correct, but an allowable technical error in the light of how Dr. Beach is presented in the publication of the WCC -�So Much in Common. In two different places (pp. 92, 102), the notation appears - "Dr B. B. Beach, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, is secretary of the Department of Public Affairs, Northern European Division, United Kingdom." This was in 1973, and in the 1976�Yearbook, he is listed as carrying the additional responsibility as Secretary of the Division. From the Catholic viewpoint, there is no question, they considered B. B. Beach as speaking for the Seventh-day Adventist Church. This event was also covered in L'Observatore Romano�the official Vatican newspaper. This is confirmed in a letter dated, October 11, 1977, written by Azenilto G. Brito, Sao Paulo, Brazil, to the General Conference.

Naturally, the hierarchy in Washington are doing everything in their power to play down this event as something "entirely innocent and meaningless." These are the very words of the Editor of the Adventist Review, Kenneth H. Wood, in a letter previously quoted. He wrote to this layman - "I am personally very well acquainted with Dr. Bert Beach and have discussed with him this visit [to the Pope]. Even though it may look sinister to Brother Grotheer,�the visit was entirely innocent and meaningless�so far as any relationship goes between SDAs and Catholics."

1)RNS�in its report of the audience with the Pope noted - "The Vatican Secretariat for Christian Unity and the Seventh-day Adventists became regular participants in the Conference [Secretaries of the World Confessional Families] in 1968." (See p. 7 of this Special Report) Thus the representative of the Adventist Church is in yearly fellowship with the representative of the Vatican Secretariat for Unity. Further, it must be kept in mind that Pope Paul told the Secretaries of the World Confessional Families [Churches] that despite "all obstacles" these leaders should unceasingly pursue the goal of "full unity in Christ and in the Church." And the Pope meant the Roman Catholic Church! It dare not be overlooked that the Catholic Bi-Weekly -�Glas Koncila�- quoted Beach as stating that it was a distinct honor to have had "an audience here in Rome with�the Holy Father." Beach did not have to refer to the Pope as "the Holy Father."

There remains still another nagging question. How was it that when the Gregorian

Pontifical University - the alma mater of popes and cardinals - opened its doors to a first non-Roman Catholic in its 425 year history, that individual was a professing Seventh-day Adventist? And why was it that a Jesuit - with all that that Order has stood for in its history - signed the Preface of the published edition of that individual's dissertation?

2)�The former associate editor of the�Review�wrote an editorial about a conference he attended at Notre Dame University following Vatican II. He stated:

"The new ecumenical climate is opening up countless opportunities for dialog with people of other faiths, both for a clearer understanding of their point of view and for sharing our own convictions with them....

"It has been my privilege to participate in several such conferences. One of these was the international Conference on Theological Issues of Vatican II at Notre Dame in March, 1966. There for an entire week the leading theologians of the Catholic Church from North American and Europe, with a liberal sprinkling of Protestant, Orthodox, and Jewish theologians, shared their mutual convictions. My seatmates to the left were Henri de Lubac, leading French theologian, and Archbishop John F. Dearden of Detroit, since then elected president of the National Council of Catholic Bishops. To my right were Father Bernard Cooke of Marquette University, and Yves Congar, another French theologian." (Review, March 23, 1967, pp. 12-13)

Think it through - Can you conceive the Associate Editor of the�Review, sharing his conviction that the Pope was "the man of sin" - the antichrist of prophecy with Archbishop Dearden? Or had he lost his historic Adventist conviction? If he truly held to it, he would not have been there in the first place. There is no record of Christ joining in theological conferences involving the Sadducees, the Pharisees, and the Herodians. Maybe Cottrell's attendance at the Notre Dame conference was "entirely innocent and meaningless" as Wood asserts.

3)�In the Silver-Tobler legal case involving the Seventh-day Adventist Church, the legal counsel for the Church submitted to the Federal Court a Brief in which it was stated:

"Although it is true that there was a period in the life of the Seventh-day Adventist Church when the denomination took a distinctly anti-Roman Catholic viewpoint, and the term, 'hierarchy' was used in a perjorative sense to refer to the papal form of church governance, that attitude on the Church's part was nothing more than a manifestation of widespread anti-popery among conservative protestant denominations in the early part of this century and the latter part of the last, and which has now been assigned to the historical trash heap so far as the Seventh-day Adventist Church is concerned." (p. 4, Footnote #2, Docket Entry #84: EEOC vs PPPA, C-74-2025 CBR)

"While, however, Adventist doctrine continues to teach that church government by one man is contrary to the Word of God, it is not good Seventh-day Adventism to express... an aversion to Roman Catholicism�as such." (p. 30)

Again the question must be asked - How can the participation of Adventist leaders in ecumenical contacts with Catholic prelates resulting from our consignment to "the trash heap" of history our historic understanding of Bible prophecy be perceived as "entirely innocent and meaningless"? Further, how can the Editor of the "Official Organ of the Church" perceive the laity as so naive that they would buy such a "line"?

The above is a photo-copy of the gold medallion given by Dr. B. B. Beach to Pope Paul VI, along with the Adventist Missionary book -�Faith in Action. This medallion was designed and sculptured by Ralph J. Menconi of the Presidential Art Medals, Inc., of Vandallia, Ohio. It was issued by this company in 1973.

The suggestion for the Seventh-day Adventist Church to be included among "the great religions of the world" series planned by the Presidential Art Medals, Inc., was made by Miss M. Carol Hetzell of the General Conference Department of Communications. Mr. Menconi "visited our world headquarters here and talked with our committee that had been set up to suggest what the medallion might incorporate." (Letter from M. Carol Hetzell, Dec. 29, 1977)

As can be seen from the above pictures, an attempt was made to incorporate certain basic Adventist teachings. The front in depicting the Second Coming of Christ does not portray the usual representation of His coming - when He shall send His angels to gather together the elect to meet the Lord in the air. Rather the angels are pictured in "Catholic" fashion adoring a risen Lord. On the back, the "IV Commandment" is abbreviated, while the other commandments are only numbered. We must keep in mind that the true Adventist emphasis in regard to the Fourth Commandment is - "the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God." The Catholic Church in its catechisms - noting it as the Third - admonishes - "Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day." (The Convert's Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 49) Thus the testimony on the medallion is muted.

The medallions of the Great Religions of the World Series were issued as follows:

Bronze	Unnumbered - Special Patina Finish	$ 4.50/medal
Silver	Antique Oxidized Finish - 5000 complete sets; 5000 individual medals (Total 10,000 Silver of each religion)	20.00 /medal
Gold	1/10 14kt. G.F. - 24kt Gold Finish - Limited issue - 500 pieces	40.00/medal

the Presidential Art Medals, Inc. The prices represent the 1973 figure. The price in 1978 as quoted to us via telephone was - Bronze, $5.00; Silver, $35.00; and Gold, $95.00. The Silver and Gold issues are serially numbered.

The cost of this medallion is being played down by the editorial voice in Washington. The Editor of the�Adventist Review�would have the laity believe that all Beach did was to obtain a trinket from a Dollar Store for the Pope. In his letter dated February 22, 1978, Elder Wood wrote:

"Representatives of the General Conference have given this medallion to heads of state and other dignitaries all around the world. We have one here in the office. It costs somewhere between $5 and $10, I believe." Either the editor is naive; or else he is "sloppy" in his research; or else he is seeking to mislead the laity. Yet he tells this layman - "When questions are raised do not depend on secondary sources such as the Grotheer newsletter. Write directly to us or the General Conference and we will be happy to give you the facts." We will let the readers of this "Special Report" determine where the documented primary sources are to be found, and where they obtain managed news releases.

We freely admit that when we first read of the gold medallion being presented to the Pope, we thought it was struck for the occasion, and wrote asking questions based on this assumption. We were told that it had been produced by the Presidential Art Medals, Inc., but were not told where in Ohio to locate this company. We used available research procedures and obtained the information direct. We found when supplied with brochures from the company that the prices vary depending when purchased. If the medallion given to the Pope came from the number first purchased by the Church in 1973, then the price would have been $40.00; but if ordered for the occasion of the presentation in 1977, then the price would have been about $95.00 as quoted to us. Thus the price at that time was nominal, and the issue is simply that this gold medallion was presented by Beach to the Pope as a "symbol of the Seventh-day Adventist Church." (Review, August 11, 1977, p. 23) Is this saying that by this token, the Church was being presented into the hands of the Pope, the antichrist?

In the letter which Dr. B. B. Beach wrote to A. G. Brito in Sao Paulo, Brazil, dated November 15, 1977, he stated:

"I am enclosing a brief statement regarding the meeting with the Pope. This statement (with one or two small modifications) appeared some time ago in the�Review and Herald.

We have reproduced this statement on the next page. (You will observe that the word, "audience" is struck through and over it is written - "meeting.") By carefully comparing this brief statement with the news item appearing in the�Review�for August 11, 1977, p. 23 ( p. 8, Special Report) , it can be seen that this is the basis for the�Review�news item. In a letter to Elder Eva, dated February 24, 1978, we sent a copy of this statement, and asked him - "Who made the change from "audience" to "meeting."? Did Beach in submitting the material to you, or did you do it, or authorize it done?" Eva refused to answer this in his letter dated, March 3, 1978.

"Why was the sentence - 'This is not the first time that an Adventist has met the pope' - omitted? What were the other times, and under what circumstances? Have there

been frequent audiences involving officials of the Church in their official capacities? If not frequent, what contacts have been made between our church leaders and the Pope and for what purposes? Since the official newspaper of the Vatican has noted this audience in regard to the Seventh-day Adventist participation as of special note, and�RNS�through its Vatican correspondent marked it as - 'the first time in history' that the Seventh-day Adventist Church through an official representative met with the Pope, have the other contacts been secret and private so that only certain members of the hierarchy know of them? These things need to be clarified."

"We feel no burden to give you the detailed information you ask for and I have not tried to do so nor to answer the further questions in your letter of February 24."

Thus it has neither been affirmed nor denied in regard to the other contacts between Adventists and the Pope or Vatican officials.

the audience "marked the first time in history that the Seventh-day Adventist Church, through an official representative, had met with a Roman Pontiff." How does one put this all together? Is the clue in the prepositional phrase, "through an official representative"?

We know of one other recorded meeting with the Pope that appeared in the�Review�with pictures. (May 30, 1968) It shows Pope Paul VI giving a souvenir medal to Dr. Lief Kr. Tobiassen. Pictured with Tobiassen are Elders R. R. Hegstad, Editor of�Liberty, and Pierre Lanares, Religious Liberty Secretary of the Southern European Division. These men were a part of "A 34-member International Church-State Study Commission, sponsored by Andrews University, the International Religious Liberty Association, and the Religious Liberty Department of the General Conference." (Review, May 16, 1968, p. 16) Hegstad in telling of the meeting with the Pope wrote:

"While in Rome the Adventist Study Commission experienced the pomp and ceremony of a papal audience in St. Peter's. It was hardly a private audience: some 5,000 shouting and clapping pilgrims were around us. Members of our group were seated not far from the high altar, which is in the midst of the serpentine Bernini columns, which, in turn, are under the central dome of St. Peter's. After the general audience, during which the Pope spoke for some 20 minutes on his year-old encyclical Populorum Progressio, L. Kr. Tobiassen, Pierre Lanares, and I were introduced to the pontiff. Dr. Tobiassen told of the purpose of our study commission and of the countries we were visiting. I then mentioned our pleasure at finding material progress toward religious liberty in Spain, where the religious schema of Vatican II is having good effect." (Ibid., p. 17)

[For source material, other than as documented, I am indebted to an article by Dr. Earle Hilgert in the�Review, October 12, 1967, pp. 4-5. Dr Hilgert, then Vice-President for Academic Administration at Andrews University, was the first Seventh-day Adventist to serve on the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches.]

In 1870, William Reed Huntington, an American Episcopalian, published a book, named -�The Church Idea. In this book, he set forth four points as a basis for Christian unity. These were:

In 1888, these four points, substantially as Huntington had proposed them, were adopted by the Bishops of the Anglican Church at the Lambeth Conference of that year, and thereafter were known as the Lambeth Quadrilateral. ��2��One must keep in mind that the Anglican Church is considered the "bridge" church between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism. In 1910 at the Edinburgh Missionary Conference,

an Episcopal (Anglican) missionary to the Philippines, Bishop Charles H. Brent, called for an organizational, interdenominational conference on questions of doctrine and organization. Herein was the idea of the Faith and Order Movement.

In 1920, the Lambeth Conference of Anglican bishops based on the Quadrilateral issued "An Appeal to All Christian People" urging the Christian world to strive for an united church. The same year representatives from 70 denominations, and 40 countries convened in Geneva, Switzerland. Bishop Charles H. Brent presided at this meeting which marked the "official" beginning of the Faith and Order Movement. The call was based on only one doctrinal confession - that "our Lord Jesus Christ [is] God and Saviour." This is also the doctrinal criterion for fellowship in the World Council of Churches.

This meeting in 1920 prepared the way for the First World Conference on Faith and Order, which was held in Lausanne, Switzerland in 1927. The Lausanne Conference adopted a methodology for the purpose of studying the differences between the various communions in the hope that such a study would lead to a better understanding of one another's position with the ultimate objective of bridging the separating canyons. Herein is the concept of "dialogue." However in the years following, an "irreconcilable" impasse developed between those who considered the church as "catholic" and those who considered the church as "protestant." This was faced up to in the Third World Conference on Faith and order on 1952 held in Lund, Sweden. Here a new methodology was adopted which sought to bridge the divisions between the "catholic" and "protestant" concepts of church. Joint studies on theological and organizational problems common to all were arranged with the conviction that in seeking cooperatively a truly Christ-centered answer to the problems previously faced, they might draw closer to one another.

In the meantime, in 1948, �3��the World Council of Churches was organized by a merger of the Faith and Order Movement, and a parallel ecumenical group, the Christian Life and Work Movement. Following the merger, the Faith and Order Movement became a Commission of the World Council of Churches, and under the World Council became a well organized structure holding working sessions every three years in preparation for further World Conferences on Faith and Order.

Near the close of the first decade of the last half of the 20th Century, events within the Catholic Church were to play a part in the ecumenical movement. On October 9, 1958, Pius XII died and was succeeded by Angelo Roncalli as Pope John XXIII. One of the announced objectives of John's Papal reign was "to bring the Church up to date." With this in mind he called for a council of bishops. The idea was his own, "a heavenly inspiration, he said when he made the announcement soon after his coronation in 1959." (Britannica, Book of the Year 1964, p. 717) Prior to the convening of Vatican II Council, October 11, 1962, Pope John "established the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity, headed by the ecumenical minded [Jesuit] Augustin Cardinal Bea, which in a very short time proved to be an effective instrument of Christian renewal and interfaith amity." (Ibid.,�p. 718) In preparation for this Council, the Vatican asked several branches of what they called "separated brethren" to appoint official observers. "The World Council of Churches, several Protestant communions, the Anglicans and at least one of the Eastern Churches responded favorably." (Ibid.,�p. 690)

In 1963, several events occurred in the ecumenical movement. Pope John died to be followed by Paul VI who announced his intention to pursue the policies of his predecessor. He convened the second session of Vatican II with overtures toward more friendly relations with other Christian bodies. By invitation, an increased number of Protestant and Orthodox observers were present at the Council. Also

during this year, the Faith and Order Commission called a consultation in Montreal, Quebec, with Roman Catholic observers present.

The Third Session of Vatican II was convened in September, 1964. Prior to this session in his Good Friday message, Pope Paul VI referred to the Anglican and Eastern Bodies as "churches" and the Protestant bodies as "communities" instead of "separated brethren," thus according them a status not previously recognized by the Catholic Church. The Seventh-day Adventist Church had "observers" at this Third Session. It was through contact between an "observer" from the Adventist Church, and one from the World Council of Churches at this Vatican Council session which produced events which eventually led to B. B. Beach's audience with the Pope on May 18, 1977. Beach documents this initial contact in these words:

"Strange as it may seem, these yearly Consultations[between the World Council of Churches and Seventh-day Adventists]�are an indirect by-product of Vatican II. In fact, while in Rome in connection with the Vatican Council a WCC staff member and an Adventist representative came to the conclusion that an informal meeting of a small group of Seventh-day Adventists with an equal number of representatives from the World Council of Churches would fulfill a useful purpose - Adventists being insufficiently informed regarding the World Council of Churches, and the WCC staff and church leaders being equally in need of additional and more comprehensive knowledge regarding the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

"The first meeting was held in 1965, the participants being selected by the two organizers." (So Much in Common, p. 98)

Out of these consultations came a series of rapid-fire events which led to a representative of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, Dr. Earle Hilgert, sitting at the Bristol, England, triennial meeting of the Faith and Order Commission of the WCC from July 30 to August 8, 1967, as a fully recognized member. ��4��First in the January, 1967, issue of the�Ecumenical Review�(Journal of the World Council Churches), a paper prepared by the Faith and Order Commission on the Seventh-day Church was published. An associate editor of the Review�responded, expressing regret that the SDA Church could not "as an organization, be more closely associated with others who profess the name of Christ." (Review, April 6, 1967, p. 13) However, he suggested that "if the Secretariat on Faith and order, for instance, were to invite SDA's to appoint someone competent in that area to meet with their group from time to time and represent the SDA point of view, we could accept such an invitation with a clear conscience." (Ibid.) The action moved so rapidly that the Central Committee of the World Council of Churches appointed Dr. Hilgert, and the General Conference approved the selection, so that Dr. Hilgert could be in Bristol, England, representing our "point of view" by the end of July the same year. When Dr. Hilgert left the Seventh-day Adventist Church, becoming a professor at McCormick Theological Seminary in Chicago, his place on the Faith and Order Commission was filled by Dr. R. F. Dederen, also of Andrews University.

Thus from 1888 to 1967 two movements were in parallel - the Faith and Order Movement for Christian unity, and the Advent Movement for a completed work on the earth. In 1967, the Seventh-day Adventist Church - a trustee under God of the Three Angel's Messages - broke the parallel and became identified with the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches.

1�--�Parallel events during the history of the ecumenical movement are most interesting and should be considered carefully. In 1870, Vatican Council I, promulgated the doctrine of Papal infallibility so that when the Pope speaks�ex cathedra�(from the chair) his utterances are as the utterances of God. It should be observed

that point #4 of the Quadrilateral is that the "historic episcopate" be the basis for organizational unity. The historic episcopate put the Bishop of Rome as the first among equals. The final outcome of the Papal doctrine formulated at Vatican I on the ecumenical process has yet to be written.

2 --�'In 1888, "the Lord in His great mercy sent a most precious message to His people through Elders Waggoner and Jones." (TM, p. 91) This message was to produce unity in truth under the Holy Spirit, and to prepare a people to reveal to the world the matchless love of God in a revelation of the image of Jesus perfectly reproduced in them. The people of God were to experience the results of the "final atonement" when in the mighty outpouring of the latter rain, "the moral image of God is to be perfected in the character. [They] are to be totally transformed into the likeness of Christ." (Ibid.,�p. 506) Through understanding the justification of God in behalf of sinners, they are to develop the trust "that divine grace�alone�can complete the work." (Ibid., p. 508)

3 --�In 1948, Israel once again became a recognized and independent nation. Coming events were casting their shadows before. In the Church, the following year, the book -�Bible Readings for the Home Circle�- a standard doctrinal presentation of the truths held by the Church was revised and the historic teaching of Seventh-day Adventists in regard to the Incarnation was altered. (See -An Interpretive History of the Doctrine of the Incarnation as Taught by the Seventh-day Adventist Church, pp. 64-66) Events were moving swiftly. In 1950, Elders R. J. Wieland and D. K. Short wrote�1888 Re-Examined�in which they warned the leadership of the Church the course they were pursuing and where continued apostacy would lead. The warning was unheeded, and the conferences with the Evangelicals culminated in the book,�Questions on Doctrine. (See next article)

4--�In 1967, the nation of Israel in the Seven Day War recaptured the Old City of Jerusalem bringing it once more under the Jewish flag after 1900 years of foreign rule. This event fulfilled Jesus' own prophecy as recorded in Luke 21:24. (See monograph -�The Times of the Gentiles Fulfilled.)

In a recent issue of�Adventist Heritage�(Vol. 4, #2, pp. 35-46), Elder T. E. Unruh discussed the conferences that took place during 1955-1956 between the Evangelicals and Seventh-day Adventist Church leaders which resulted in the book -�Questions on Doctrine. His involvement in these conferences places him in an unique position to state what took place; who all were involved; and what the issues were. He writes - "I served as moderator or chairman throughout the series." (p. 37) �1��During these years, he was President of the East Pennsylvania Conference with headquarters at Reading. He sparked the whole episode by writing a letter to Dr. Donald G. Barnhouse commending his radio messages on the book of Romans as a true presentation of righteousness by faith. 2

When the results of these conferences were finalized in the book -�Questions on Doctrine�- no author's name appeared. It was presented as a work of "The Editorial

Committee," which also remained anonymous. (See�Questions on Doctrine, p. 10) Now in this historical review, Unruh names the people who were involved - many of whom were suspected at that time. He writes - "Froom, who had a facile pen, took the responsibility of composing the initial answers" to the questions advanced by the Evangelicals. This was a document of "twenty pages." (Heritage, op. cit., p. 38) This accounts for the basic similarity in doctrinal heresy between the book -Questions on Doctrine�- and Froom's book -�Movement of Destiny. It needs to be noted at this point - while much detail is being given by Unruh as to who the authors of�Questions on Doctrine�were - all the questions involved in the controversy resulting from its publication cannot be answered until each of the documents leading up to the final draft are released for careful analysis. This has not been done as yet.

Others involved in the initial confrontation with the Evangelicals were Elder W. E. Read, who in 1955 was a Field Secretary of the General Conference. R. Allan Anderson, editor of the�Ministry�at the time, whom Unruh describes as possessing a "gift for diplomatic dialogue with leaders of other communions," joined the group at Froom's request. (Ibid., p. 39)

For the Evangelicals, the initial conferences involved only Walter R. Martin and George E. Cannon, a professor of theology on the Faculty of Nyack Missionary College (New York). However, the whole consulation broadened with the prospects that Dr. Barnhouse was planning to become personally involved with a series of sessions in his own home at Doylestown, Pennsylvania. At this point, Elder R. R. Figuhr, president of the General Conference, "gave the support of his office to the conferences and the publication of the definitive statement of Adventist belief which resulted." (Ibid., p. 39) After the sessions at Barnhouse's home, "it was planned to demonstrate consensus" within the church "by submitting the questions and answers to Adventist leaders in North America, and then around the world using a mailing list of more than 250 names." The document had grown from the first twenty pages to book size involving some sixty questions and answers." (Ibid., p. 41)

At this juncture a committee of fourteen members was appointed with the General Conference approval. They were - R. R. Figuhr (Chariman), A. V. Olson, W.B. Ochs, L. K. Dickson, H. L. Rudy, A. L. Ham, J. I. Robinson, W. R. Beach, C. L. Torrey, F. D. Nichol, and the Adventist conferees - Unruh, Anderson, Froom, and Read. (Ibid.) It will be noted by those who remember the make-up of the General Conference hierarchy at that time, these men were the officers of the General Conference - president, vice-presidents, secretary, treasurer, plus Figuhr's personal secretary, and the Editor of the�Review. This fact dare not be overlooked for the apostasy presented in the book -�Questions on Doctrine�- carried the approbation of the highest spokesmen of the Church. When the book was being prepared for publication, an editorial committee chaired by A. V. Olson was appointed with W. E. Read, M. Thurber, W. G. C. Murdoch, R. Hammill, L. E. Froom, and R. Allan Anderson as consultants. (Ibid., p. 44) These names are revealing for Murdoch served a long period of time as Dean of the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, and Dr. Richard Hammill has been president of Andrews University. Thus, the involvement in the book -�Questions on Doctrine�reads like a Who's Who among the leadership of the Church at that period.

The most critical revelation is how these original conferees - Unruh, Froom, Anderson, and Read - perceived of their work and the results of that work. To Unruh, this book which resulted from the consultations with the Evangelicals "is a definitive statement of�contemporary�Adventist beliefs." (Ibid., p. 35) This is emphasized throughout the report in�Adventist Heritage. Unruh writes that the Evangelical conferees "were satisfied that we were presenting�contemporary�Adventist doctrines." (Ibid.�p. 38) Yet the Adventist participants did not conceive

What were the beliefs which our conferees presented as "contemporary" Adventist doctrines in contrast to the historical position of the Church? The over-all picture involved "correcting misconceptions about Adventist doctrines as to the nature of Christ in the incarnation, the Trinity, and the completed atonement on the cross." (Ibid.,�p. 42)

This brings us to the second vital point:�2)��The book -�Questions on Doctrine�- was supposed to have been merely a clarification and amplification of "The Statement of Beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists" first published in 1931, and "later given General Conference approval [in 1950] and regularly included in church manuals and yearbooks of the denomination." (Ibid., p. 44) Herein is a dilemma. Was this 1931 Statement of Beliefs a correct representation of those statements of belief first published by Elder James White in the first edition of the�Signs of the Times, which he declared to be held "with great unanimity" by the Church? (June 4, 1874, Editorial) Concerning these same beliefs, Uriah Smith wrote: - "There is, so far as is known, entire unanimity throughout the body." (R&H, Aug. 22, 1912) Or was the 1931 Statement of Fundamental Beliefs a change of doctrinal course within the Church? Or did the conferees representing the Church seek to interpret the 1931 Statement of Beliefs in such a way to be acceptable to the Evangelicals? While the possibility exists that the historic faith of the Church was altered in the 1931 Statement, Unruh's report of events during the conferences leads one to believe that the latter possibility is a more viable answer. He wrote - "Our friends [Barnhouse and Martin] helped us to express our beliefs in terms more easily understood by theologians of other communions." (Heritage, op. cit., p. 40) Further, Unruh reveals that as a result of these conferences, Frank E. Gaebelein, an official in the National Association of Evangelicals, wrote, "stating in his opinion, that the Seventh-day Adventist church would qualify for membership in the evangelical group." (Ibid., p. 42)

Two other observations must be noted in Unruh's report. He traces the original answers from a twenty-page document, to a preliminary document sent to at least 250 leaders of the Church in different parts of the world, to a final book of 720 pages. It is known and can be documented that the final result - the book,�Questions on Doctrine�- is itself a revision of the original answers given to the Evangelical conferees. The book is heretical enough; what were the original answers like? This is still held in secret, and until all the documents are given the light of day, we shall not know how dark was the apostasy committed by the Adventist conferees - Unruh, Anderson, Froom, and Read. T. E. Unruh in his reporting does call attention to an article appearing in�Eternity, entitled, "Are Seventh-day Adventists Christians?" (Sept., 1956) This was written by Barnhouse himself. Unruh quotes only a non-critical paragraph from the article. This article, however, reveals how far the Church leaders went in compromise of the historic teachings of the Church. Barnhouse wrote concerning his view of the experience which took place following October 22, 1844, and the Adventist conferees assessment.

"It is to my mind, therefore, nothing more than a human, face-saving idea! It should also be realized that some uninformed Seventh-day Adventists took this idea and carried it to fantastic literalistic extremes. Mr. Martin and I heard the Adventist leaders say, flatly, that they repudiated all such extremes. This they said in no uncertain terms. Further, they do not believe as some of their earlier teachers taught, that Jesus' atoning work was not completed on Calvary but instead that He was still carrying on a second ministering work since 1844. This idea is also totally repudiated. They believe that since His ascension Christ has been ministering the benefits of the atonement He completed on Calvary." �3

As a final observation, Unruh claims that Elder M. L. Andreasen was the sole source for the controversy which followed the publication of the book -�Questions on Doctrine." ��4 ��He also claims that Andreasen made his "peace" with the hierarchy and that "incident was soon closed." (Heritage, op. cit., p. 45) The burden of proof that Andreasen repudiated his opposition to the changes made in historic Adventist teaching as set forth in the book, Questions on Doctrine,, rests with Unruh. This he does not give. To our knowledge, Andreasen never repudiated the charges he made, nor what he wrote in�Letters to the Churches.

1��--�Following his service as President of the East Pennsylvania Conference, T. E. Unruh came to the Indiana Conference where I was serving, and served for seven years as a pastor and evangelist. I knew that he was connected with the conferences between the Evangelicals and our men in Washington, but not until the publication of the report in�Adventist Heritage, did I know that he served as chairman of the dialogues. Now I can understand the vehemence of the reaction which he displayed toward me because of the stand I took on the book,Questions on Doctrine. I recall vividly one experience. A. V. Olson had been invited to be the key speaker at one of the campmeetings. Following the campmeeting - mind you during the breaking up of the camp - I was called off the work detail for a private conference with Olson and Unruh. I was asked concerning my position on the Incarnation. I asked these men to define for me the word - "infinite." They demurred but I assured them that I wasn't trying to catch them. Then they gave me an answer. I told them that this was what I believed about the humanity of Christ, quoting - "Tell the wanderer of an almighty hand that will hold them up, of an�infinite humanity�in Christ that pities them." (Christ's Object Lessons, p. 388) The two men - Olson and Unruh - then got into an argument over Matthew 8:17 that Jesus "took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses." They discussed whether Christ could take a cold. I had to smile for it reminded me of the story of the medieval theologians arguing over how many spirits could dance on a pinhead. This enraged Unruh who said to Olson - "I want to tell you about this man. He has a very peculiar personality. Whatever he says to the laity, they believe; but they won't believe what I tell them about theology." This embarrassed Olson, who broke up the meeting stating he had a plane to meet. We had prayer together and Olson apologized that I had been called in before them, but not Unruh who argued with me all the way down the hall to the outside entrance of the building we were in.

2��--�For a minister of the Seventh-day Adventist Church to commend a Babylonian Evangelical on his presentations from the book of Romans reveals his own lack of a knowledge of the true gospel and righteousness by faith. It is not very likely that Unruh had any acquaintance at that time with Waggoner's Studies in Romans, or much of a concept of what took place during the decade following 1888. The only publication available on 1888 at the time Unruh wrote his first letter to Barnhouse - November 28, 1949 - was Daniells' book -�Christ and His Righteousness. Wieland and Short's manuscript -�1888 Re-Examined�- had not been written.

3��--�This paragraph is taken from a photocopy of the complete article, "Are Seventh-day Adventist Christians?" as found in�Eternity, September, 1956.

4��--�Unruh's reasoning regarding Andreasen and the agitation following the publication of�Questions on Doctrine�is typically Unruhism. He wrote:

Such a conclusion was inaccurate. I know from personal experience of my own concern about the articles appearing in the�Ministry, and of a letter I wrote to Elder H. L. Rudy asking for an explanation. It was not until the book, Questions on Doctrine�had been published, and I was discussing the questionable parts with friends in Canada that I was told about Andreasen's opposition. But this is the way Unruh's mind worked. Many people may be concerned; but always there is just one and only one agitator - the people cannot think for themselves - whom he seeks to zero in on. At a campmeeting in Indiana - one year prior to the experience noted in Footnote #1 - R. Allan Anderson was the main speaker. The laity challenged him over and over again after his presentations of the "new look" in Adventism. Unruh concluded there could be only one man responsible for this reaction on the part of the laity - that was Grotheer. He called a meeting of the entire ministerial staff after the evening service. This confrontation was held in the chapel of the old Administration building on the campus of Indiana Academy, and lasted till 1 a.m. Two other ministers and myself withstood Anderson to the face regarding the work of Christ as priest as portrayed in the book, Questions on Doctrine, and the historic teaching of the pioneers of this message in regard to the final atonement, and whether Crozier had the true light on the sanctuary.

It might be wondered why a documentation as to the origin of the book, Questions on Doctrine, is included in a compilation of materials on the Audience with the Pope, and the "Roots" of the Ecumenical Movement. The article - "The Seventh-day Adventist Church"- which appeared in the January, 1967, issue of�Ecumenical Review, a publication of the World Council of Churches, was based largely on this book as indicated in the footnotes of the article. Of the 49 footnotes, 27, more than half, are noted as from the book,�Questions on Doctrine. In other words, the consultations between the leadership of the WCC and the SDA's found common ground because of the positions taken in the book. "Contemporary Adventism" permitted what historic Adventism could not countenance. While originally written to create a bond between the Evangelicals and the Adventist leadership, it was also used to accomplish a working relationship with the WCC, and finally led to the appointment of an Adventist theologian to the Faith and Order Commission. Even as Hosea said of Israel of old - "Ephraim is also like a silly dove without heart: they call to Egypt, they go to Assyria" (Hosea 7:11), so also we called to the Evangelicals, we have gone to the World Council of Churches.